On Mar 16, 2011, at 02:46 , eckinator wrote: > oh and speaking of water, in the past 1000 years of recorded history > and not counting 2011 in Japan 150.000+ tsunami victims are > documented. not counting the unsung. someone with a little more brains > and a little less greed would not have placed their nuke plants on the > shore line for lack of inland water but installed aqueducts and pumps > instead and taken their plants to dryer grounds...
There ya go! Except don't those pumps need power to operate to get that water up the hill to the power plants? And isn't that the main glitch in the systems in Japan right now? Well, they have generators to provide that, don't they? And they did use some, I don't know if the original ones or some brought in to replace the capability of those rendered inoperable by the Tsunami. Don't know the specifics. But from what I understand those were a no-go because they couldn't get the fuel to power them after the first day or so. As I discussed with some friends yesterday, I think any reactors built in the future should be situated uphill from the ocean, and downhill from a gazillion gallon water source, like a lake or man-made reservoir, that could gravity feed reactors for a few weeks in an emergency. It would need to be much higher than the plant, as it takes quite a but of pressure to pump water into a pressurized containment vessel. Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com http://gallery.me.com/jomac -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
